A/RES/59/38 The term “immunity” in article 10 is to be understood in the context of the present Convention as a whole. Article 10, paragraph 3, does not prejudge the question of “piercing the corporate veil”, questions relating to a situation where a State entity has deliberately misrepresented its financial position or subsequently reduced its assets to avoid satisfying a claim, or other related issues. With respect to article 11 The reference in article 11, paragraph 2 (d), to the “security interests” of the employer State is intended primarily to address matters of national security and the security of diplomatic missions and consular posts. Under article 41 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and article 55 of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, all persons referred to in those articles have the duty to respect the laws and regulations, including labour laws, of the host country. At the same time, under article 38 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and article 71 of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the receiving State has a duty to exercise its jurisdiction in such a manner as not to interfere unduly with the performance of the functions of the mission or the consular post. With respect to articles 13 and 14 The expression “determination” is used to refer not only to the ascertainment or verification of the existence of the rights protected, but also to the evaluation or assessment of the substance, including content, scope and extent, of such rights. With respect to article 17 The expression “commercial transaction” includes investment matters. With respect to article 19 The expression “entity” in subparagraph (c) means the State as an independent legal personality, a constituent unit of a federal State, a subdivision of a State, an agency or instrumentality of a State or other entity, which enjoys independent legal personality. The words “property that has a connection with the entity” in subparagraph (c) are to be understood as broader than ownership or possession. Article 19 does not prejudge the question of “piercing the corporate veil”, questions relating to a situation where a State entity has deliberately misrepresented its financial position or subsequently reduced its assets to avoid satisfying a claim, or other related issues. 14